Conventions

Lenny Curry briefly discusses the impact of a national convention.



Michele Bachmann speaks at the California Republican Party Convention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8NWt2fdXo

I know this is not a C-SPAN video. However, I really wanted to share what a convention from past years is like. This is from 1988.

To Speak, or Not to Speak

Something that seems to be occurring this election year, and maybe unlike any other, is the audience participation in the recent GOP debates. Now, this is not something I am necessarily knowledgeable of, but that is the point of this particular post. Figuring out why this may happen, if there has ever been another time in history where audiences have been so outspoken. That being said, if you actually read this, please express your thoughts and opinions as well.

So let’s start with the history of presidential debates.

These debates were created for television. The Republican and Democratic  nominees did not even debate until 1960 with Nixon and Kennedy. The next debate did not occur until ’76 with Carter and Ford. When spectators started attending the debates, it was a “go sit, and keep your mouth closed” kind of deal, on the respectable side. 

Even in 1984, it was expected that the audience would be reserved. But, in ’84, when a little applause occurred the moderator, Sander Vanocur, quickly silenced them. He said, “I beseech you’ try to hold your applause, please.” Vanocur also commented that that kind of emotion is more appropriate for athletic events, and not in political debates.

By 2003, voter questions were submitted over the internet for the pre-primary debates. By 2008, they introduced Youtube questions, and this year, Twitter. These new tactics are clearly encouraging viewers involvement, which in turn encourages audience participation, naturally. It seems that the more spectator participation is encouraged the more “brawl-like” feel these debates have to them. It takes away from the issues at hand, and turns it into something that media eats up. Obviously that is not the point of a debate.

In case you’ve missed them, this year there have been three particular instances, where the audience participation is truly nothing less than inappropriate.

The first of these occurred, during the first GOP debate in California. Rick Perry was asked about the amount of executions in the state of Texas. Whenever it was pointed out that Perry has overseen 234 executions the audience cheered. They cheered over the deaths of others.

During the debate held in Tampa, FL, Ron Paul was asked by the moderator about healthcare and insurance policies. After his response the moderator asked “Are you saying that society should let him die?” And a few members of the audience cheered and yelled, “Yeah!”

But the most talked about outburst occurred during the debate on September 22^nd in Florida. A youtube question came from a gay soldier in Iraq asking if the candidates planned to circumvent the end of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Then a handful of spectators booed the soldier. 

Even in the debate that took place last week on the 11th, there was an outburst from a spectator. Unfortunately, it was unintelligible, but clearly something to take note of. 

Now, of course, these are controversial issues in themselves. But as a whole, the participation is also one to argue about. Some people like the audience participation, others do not. I am personally not a fan. I’ve read, and agree, that these outbursts are quite reminiscent to the guillotine days during the French Revolution. A little barbaric for my taste.

I found a website that specifically talks about the psychology behind these newfangled outbursts, that I find quite interesting. Please take a look. 

Another Day, Another Debate

The most recent debate was held in Hanover, New Hampshire at Dartmouth. Fancy. I don’t know what it was about this particular debate, but I was not a huge fan of the first 50 minutes. Maybe it was because they were sitting at a round table with coffee mugs. Maybe it was because the younger female monitor had a sassy attitude. Or maybe it was because everyone kept talking over each other.
Not that I’m a huge Santorum fan, but from what I saw, he was asked only asked one question in the first of hour, of the entire debate. When Charlie Rose went to cut him off Santorum responded with, “I am not done yet. I’ve only been able to answer one question, unlike everybody else here, so let me just finish what I’m saying.” You tell ‘em Rick. Poor guy seems to be fighting a losing battle. He deserves a 9.9(.9) on my I.B.I. scale for that.

The second half of the debate I found to be more compelling. The GOP candidates were able to ask each other questions. That’s always a recipe for something of interest.
So what were some of the questions? Well, Ms. Bachmann, decked out in all white, asked Perry what he will do differently than Obama. The answer? Nothing you haven’t heard before. Next, the always entertaining, Herman Cain questions Romney’s ability to name all 59 points in his 160 page plan. And that is just the start of many questions addressed to Romney. But that doesn’t seem to intimidate him one bit. Every answer seems to be handled with much ease and eloquence, really.

Something I really found interesting was a quote from Cain that he was addressed about. The quote is, “… don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself.” According to Cain that quote does not refer to the 14 million people “who are out of work for no reason…” but it is directed towards the protestors. Either way, I’m not sure those are words that are easy to just accept. Food for thought, I suppose.

Truthfully, this was the most lack luster debate for me. So what did I do? Fact checking. I actually found a webpage that came up with 13 facts for this particular debate. So I wanted to share a couple.

Jon Huntsman was quoted saying, “The IRS is already planning on 19,500 new employees to administer that mandate. That will stay, and that’s the ruinous part of ‘Obamacare.’”
Who knows where he got this figure from, but according to the IRS budge request for 2012 the new number of employees is 1,300.

During the debate Cain was approached by Ron Paul about calling the Federal Reserve ignorant. Of course, Cain denied such a thing. But read the quote that Paul was referring to:
“I don’t know why people think we’re gonna learn this great amount of information by auditing the Federal Reserve. I think a lot of people are calling for this audit of the Federal Reserve because they don’t know enough about it.” Hmmm. So he didn’t actually say “ignorant”, but he might as well have.


Quote of the Day: “I'm a mother of 28 kids, 22 foster kids, 5 biological kids.” –Michele Bachmann (Wait, how many kids have you mothered?)

Our Vote

Michael Worley and Zach Howell of the College Republican/Democrat National committee talk about the globalization in higher education. This is a topic I myself have never heard much about, and found it especially interesting to hear both sides perspectives.



Again, Worley and Howell discuss whether there's fire on the republican or democratic side with the a potential up-rise of independents.



Sara Haile-Mariam from Campus Progress handles an unnecessarily rude phone call with grace, and stands up for young people.

Moderate Shmoderate

Today, I had a conversation with my mom about the Presidential Candidates, who she likes/doesn’t like, and the things she wishes she knew more about. So what does my mom feel like she’s missing?

A moderate G.O.P. Candidate. “I’m tired of hearing people say how they’re anti-Obama, and why people believe that that statement alone makes them a good candidate.” This is something that has crossed my mind before as well. Yet, never has been something I’ve really looked into. Is there a candidate who has never slammed Obama in a debate?

So let’s review a couple of our beloved candidates.

-Michele Bachmann- Obviously out. This woman can’t even answer two questions in a row without making an anti-Obama comment.

-Newt Gingrich- Based off of how this issues is portrayed in the media, I’d be surprised if Gingrich didn’t make digs at Obama in his sleep.

-Mitt Romney- Has his anti-Obama moments. His metaphors are always the best. “What's happened over the last 20, 30 years is we've gone from a pay phone world to a smartphone world and President Obama keeps jamming quarters into the pay phone thinking things are going to get better. It's not connected, Mr. President.”

I recently went through the last two debates (September 12^th & 22^nd) transcripts on washingtonpost.com, and searched “Obama” to see how many times his name was mentioned. Here are the combined results:

Bachmann- 25

Romney- 16

Perry- 8

Gingrich- 5

Cain- 4

Huntsman- 4

Santorum- 3

And who is the one candidate to NOT slam Obama in the recent debates? RON PAUL, ladies and gentleman! (And Gary Johnson, but he doesn’t really count.)

Paul is keeping it classy with no digs to be heard. Bachmann on the other hand shows no mercy, and no other points of interest, with her whopping 25 mentions.

So let’s talk about Ms. Bachmann. What can she offer besides a repeal of Obamacare?

According to her website her top priorities are to:

-Restore our economy and create millions of new jobs.

-Repeal Obamacre and is unconstitutional mandates. (She just had to add the unconstitutional part.)

-Achieve deep cuts in spending to reduce America’s debt.

-Strengthen the family and defend marriage.

-Rebuild respect for America as the shining city upon a hill. (Shining city? Upon a hill? Come now.)

All of this certainly sounds like a nice little sentiment. But take a look at the issues section on her website. Almost half of every issue section talks about the failure of Obama. I’ll give the Bachmann team about a 1.2 on my I.B.I scale for wasting space. We get it Michele. You don’t like Obama.

I guess Bachmann doesn’t have my mom’s vote, huh?

Does she have yours?

For Me

Clearly there are two candidates that are (somehow) leading the pack: Mitt Romney & Rick Perry. I know this isn’t news to anyone, but I feel the need to write out exactly what they each are campaigning for myself. I want to know what the similarities and differences are between the two candidates, even the personal things. I want to see the “facts” laid out in front of me . This will all be based off of their individual websites, and only an example of my research.

PERRY-
From: Texas
Education: Bachelor’s in Animal Science from Texas A & M
Title: Governor of Texas
Jobs: Did what he did in Texas- Establish incentive funds, supports budgets that invest in education, and lawsuit reforms.
Fiscal Responsibility: Control spending and taxes.
Health Care: Create more jobs (so American can be covered by employer-sponsored health plans), and repeal Obamacare.

ROMNEY-
From: Michigan
Education: Brigham Young University – dual degrees from Harvard Law & Harvard Business School.
Title: Former Governor of Massachusetts
Jobs: Plans to submit a jobs package to Congress that has five major proposals and will demand that Congress act upon this package within 30 days
Fiscal Responsibility: Cut federal spending, balance budget, and return power to the states and the people.
Health Care: Repeal Obamacare and replace with market-based reforms, taking the power away from federal government.

This is only the tiniest portion of issues to compare, of course. However, simply looking at the websites you get a hint of difference. You seem to get more of a history of Rick Perry’s career and the future plans from Mitt Romney. Comparing these candidates is something that will continue outside of this blog and expand to more of the president hopefuls. Just for kicks, take a look at these videos from the candidates campaign.

Rick Perry
Mitt Romney

Campaign Finance

Meredith McGeHee briefly discusses the difference between the previous elections campaign finance and how it differs from todays.



McGeHee explains how less than 1% of Americans financially contribute to campaigns.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296500-1

Watch 4:33-5:44 to see what Charlie Cook has to say about how money affects a candidate's campaign.

I Ate Through This Debate

Why, yes, I am going to talk about the most recent debate held in Florida last Thursday. (The title will make sense later, I promise.)

The most discussed topics in this particular debate were the Economy & Immigration. But seeing as how my jar full of change is getting full, let’s stick with economy for today.

The first question asked what each candidate would do to help small businesses hire new employees and grow in this “troublesome” economy. Rick Perry takes the lead by talking about what he has done in Texas. (Shocking.) Basically his solution: lower the taxes. Great Rick, now tell us how you plan to do that. The moderator addresses Perry by stating that all of the other candidates have a jobs plan that is written down and people can read for themselves. Everyone except him, that is. So where is it?

“Well, you will see a more extensive jobs plan. But the fact of the matter is, you look at the state of Texas…,” states Perry. (I’ll put that at about a TWO on the I.B.I scale.) Apparently, he couldn’t come up with a direct answer. Needless to say he didn’t exactly come out of the gate ready to go, and, unfortunately, that is the path that he chose for the rest of the night.

Mitt Romney also addressed the question by saying that our corporate and employer tax rates need to be competitive. Then goes on to review the first few steps in his 59 point plan.

The always compelling, Newt Gingrich is asked about unemployment benefits, to which he replies that people should not receive money for doing nothing. Blunt, but at least he answers the question.

**Now, how are these candidates going to turn this country around?

Jon Huntsman will take his tax reform package, regulatory reform, energy independence and take it all to Congress.

Herman Cain, besides his 999 plan, will lead us back up a hill. Good to know. (And congrats on Florida.)

Michele Bachmann will repeal Obamacare.

Romney will place his hand on his heart, tell the truth, live with integrity and lead our country like a true patriot.

Perry wants to, of course, be a leader, repeal Obamacare, and lower tax rates.

Ron Paul will help us understand about the bubbles, and get the people to create jobs and not the government.

Gingrich plans on Obama not getting re-elected.

Rick Santorum shall believe in the American people.

Last but not least, Gary Johnson promises to balance the federal budget.

So, for the real question: Did I really eat my way through this debate? The answer: Absolutely. You have to eat when you watch something as catfight-y as this debate. You can always count on the Perry vs. Romney (nice try) love fest, but this time we got a little Santorum vs. Huntsman action! Watching Santorum attempt to interrupt Huntsman was definitely popcorn-eating worthy.

Quote of The Day: “My next-door neighbor's two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration.”- Gary Johnson

Bachmann vs. Perry

An issue seems to be heating up more every day between Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry: the HPV vaccine.  (This vaccine is to mainly prevent cervical cancer in young women.)

So, why is this causing such a stir between to the representatives?

Well to start, Texas has an HPV vaccine policy. This policy states that all females entering the sixth grade will receive the vaccine, with some exceptions of course. Keep that in mind.

Now, during the Republican Primary debate this past week, Bachmann accused Perry of taking a $5,000 campaign contribution from a medical company, Merck, so that in turn he will support the HPV vaccine policy in Texas. To which Perry denies by stating, “If you’re saying I can be bought for $5,000, I’m offended.”

What are Bachmann & Perry’s stances on this issue?

Bachmann is anything, but for this policy. She comes at this from the angle of a concerned parent.  Bachmann fears that it gives young girls the idea that this vaccine can protect against any STD. Not only that, but that certain side effects from the vaccine are just too risky.

Perry, on the other hand, was looking at the HPV vaccine as “pro-life” attempt. Ever since he launched his GOP presidential bid, he claims to have changed his position on the vaccine mandate and is in full support of over-turning it. In this past week’s debate Perry commented on his mistake and that he would do it over again if he could.

While Perry’s plea of regret might ease some parents’ minds, Bachmann is one parent who won’t accept it. With latest research it doesn’t seem that her accusations, of Perry’s suspicious involvements with support of the vaccine, are too far off.

The Washington Post released an article early September 13^th that will clarify more appropriately than myself.

“It soon emerged that Perry was close to one of the lobbyists who was pushing for the order and who worked for the vaccine’s New Jersey-based manufacturer. That lobbyist, Mike Toomey, had served as Perry’s chief of staff and has since helped found a super PAC aimed at boosting Perry’s bid for the presidency.” (Dan Eggen)

…

“At the time that he did this, it just had everybody scratching their heads,” said Andrew Wheat, research director at Texans for Public Justice, an Austin-based watchdog group that has frequently locked horns with Perry. “He wasn’t known as a crusader for women’s health. There’s no explanation that seems to make sense other than that Toomey’s got his ear and he got Perry to do this favor for him.” (Eggen)

Nonetheless, this is an issue that is far from having any sort of closure.

See what Bachmann had to say on Jay Leno.

Electoral College Pros and Cons

Rob Richie and John Samples share the opinions on whether the Electoral College is still useful or not.



Thomas Mann discusses the history of the Electoral College.



John Koza briefly describes the National Popular Vote bill, and why it should pass.

The First

Welcome to my very own Discoveries of the Road: a place where I will be discovering how Presidential candidates campaign their way to the top, what said candidates stand for, and occasionally I will rate them on a scale (entitled "I'll Buy It") of 1-10. There will even be a quote of the day!

Earlier this week the Republican presidential primary debate was held in Tamp, FL. The first, and what seemed to be, the longest, most heated topic was that of Social Security.  Bachman was first out of the gate, claiming to have “feet in the private sector and a foot in the federal government.” She says that she knows what to do and has the conviction to make changes that senior citizen can count on. I’ll give that a 4 on the I.B.I scale for grammar choices.

What seemed to be the biggest phrase of this topic was, “ponzi scheme”. Now, this is a phrase that the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, originally used to describe social security before having an article printed in USA Today saying that he thinks social security should be saved.

After Perry reinforced his opinions printed in the USA Today article, the always “not so fair complexioned” Mitt Romney states how the term ponzi scheme is too over the top and all it does is frighten people. Perry pointed out that all Romney is doing is scaring people. While they discussed what’s in each other’s books and who scares who more, it wound up sounding like a “my horse is bigger than your horse” kind of conversation. The former governor of Utah, Jon Huntsman, also seems to think that Romney and Perry’s debate is too dramatic, and says that it’s the entire Republican party that is frightening the people. “We’ve got the answers. We don’t have leadership,” he says. Took the thoughts right out of my head, Huntsman. How did you know?

Notably, Ron Paul gets in a few applause moments with his early mentions of getting our troops home and ending this war.  However, when healthcare starts rearing it’s head and Paul is the one on the line, he seems to waver between letting Americans take risks by not having a healthcare plan and never turning away people who are in need of healthcare. It’s really never clear. What is clear, is the audience member who screams “YEA” in reference to letting people die if they don’t have healthcare.

Throughout this debate you hear Herman Cain speak of his 999 plan, how Perry created over one million jobs in Texas, metaphors from Romney, and, of course, abolishing Obamacare. But for the more personal touches we hear what each candidate would bring to White House if elected. A beautiful wife, the constitution, and a Harley Davidson motorcycle are among the answers. Thankfully, if Herman Cain is elected, we can expect a sense of humor to be roaming about the halls. Can a “that’s what she said” joke finally be heard in the oval office? Maybe we’ll never know.

Quote of the Day: “Texas saves lives.”- Rick Perry